Connecticut school shooting: 18 children among 27 dead | Page 6 | General Discussion Topics | Forum

A A A
Avatar

Please consider registering
guest

sp_LogInOut Log In sp_Registration Register

Register | Lost password?
Advanced Search

— Forum Scope —






— Match —





— Forum Options —





Minimum search word length is 3 characters - maximum search word length is 84 characters

sp_Feed Topic RSS sp_TopicIcon
Connecticut school shooting: 18 children among 27 dead
December 19, 2012
7:08 pm
Avatar
capricorn
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 722
Member Since:
July 20, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

"DIss0n80r" wrote: [quote="at1with0"][quote="DIss0n80r"]That's insane. People are just gonna do what they want to do, anyway? So laws are pointless? You're a fruit loop.

[Image Can Not Be Found]

+1

Oh Hey DIssOn80r (aka, the guy who puts words in everyones mouth) I never said laws are pointless, I said I dont want to get off on a tanget, but thanks again for coming.
-1

"at1with0" wrote: I think analyzing the data to study the effectiveness of gun control, one HAS to subdivide the data into at least two categories, crimes committed with a gun and without. The difference between crimes with guns and crimes without using guns is going to be the only thing that would prove or disprove the effectiveness of gun control.

I'll tell you what, you don't even need perform a study. I'll even concede to the fact that the number of crimes committed with a gun will probably fall near 0%. Obviously, if guns are hard to come by, then guns cant be used. However, again my argument is it will have no affect on overall crime. Isnt this what we are esentially trying to do figure out? How to reduce crime??

People will still murder and kill regardless if its with a gun or not. So then I ask you, what is your goal with gun control? Just to say that people aren't killing with guns anymore???

If you want to impose gun control just to say, "look nobody was killed with a gun this year", then gun control is your answer.

However, if you want to solve the problem of crime, gun control is not your answer. In fact, as the stats show, it can even have the reserve affect.

As far as using airplanes as human guided missiles, that was solved with installing a $20 lock on the cabin door. All the other TSA stuff is there to inconvenience americans and has cost us all much more than its worth. Much like Gun Control would.

"a free society depends on a virtuous and moral people."

December 19, 2012
7:10 pm
Avatar
capricorn
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 722
Member Since:
July 20, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

"rath" wrote: [quote="capricorn"]Rath, sometimes I wonder why I even respond to you.

The fraser institude is a credible organization. The science is there, the facts are there... closing your eyes and saying otherwise is simply ignorant.

But lets get right to the point

[Image Can Not Be Found]
http://www.aic.gov.au/statistics/violen ... ctims.html

Laugh Laugh Laugh Laugh

You say that the Fraser institute is a credible organization, yet you abandon your use of their site & instead use the link to the site i provided . Embarassed Embarassed Embarassed Embarassed

For shame.

I didnt abandon, still stand by. Just posted links to your site to add to the credibility, thaks for your link proves my point even more.

"a free society depends on a virtuous and moral people."

December 19, 2012
7:14 pm
Avatar
DIss0n80r
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 4161
Member Since:
April 20, 2011
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

So your "argument" is that there will still be violence without guns, so there's no point in trying to curb gun violence?

What planet do you hail from?

"I can conceive of nothing in religion, science, or philosophy, that is anything more than the proper thing to wear, for a while." ~ Charles Fort

December 19, 2012
7:19 pm
Avatar
rath
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 4297
Member Since:
April 9, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

"capricorn" wrote: Well, I did provide the link to the spreadsheet just below the image.

Homicide spiked in 1999, 3 years after gun control went effect, and again in 2002, 6 years after gun control went into affect. It fell in 2007, but there is no proof it was related to gun control nor has any decline shown to be consistently dropping. You cant just measure 1 year and say that gun control has worked.

Assault, Sexual Assault and Kidnapping however has consistently risen. Robbery hasnt changed much, but that was after 7 consecutive years of it rising after the law went into affect.

If you are going to measure the affects to Gun control, you have to account for all crimes statistics which are not looking good down under

Yet you still have not shown an overall rise in crime .... & you cant.

Assault & other crimes may have risen ..... but then many other crimes have fallen to offset the rises in other areas.

Example ....... cattle rustling, ( down ) Stealing of bread ( down ) stealing of human slaves ( down ).

Like i said already.

"rath" wrote: [quote="greeney2"]You have your own problems to solve in Australia! Gun control did not solve them.
emerov, "Australia experiencing more violent crime despite gun ban," D.C. Examiner, April 8, 2009.

Full Article List

Sexual assault -- Australia's equivalent term for rape. Laugh Since when.

Rape is rape, forced sexual intercourse without consent. ...... where as sexual assault is a large & more varied rage of crimes. Sexual assault is more like second degree rape, & can be anything from slapping a co worker on the arse, to trying to kiss or fondle a person at a bar while you where drunk.

ERGO ....... Sexual assault is a far cry from Rape.

So it is very clear the author of this story has fiddled with the facts to create a bias, in the hope of pushing their own agenda.

But the facts are the facts. Gun crime is down in Australia because the Australian people & the Australian Government banned all assault weapons & semi automatic weapons after the Port Arthur

Also, Australia's overall rise in crime is on par with the rest of the world. & has little to do with the actual rise in crime & more to do with the fact that the Australian government like other governments around the world have passed laws & criminalized more & more activity's.

Example ......

Take a look at the crime figure's of the 1900 - 1950 ....... Crime was very low back then.
Not because crime was not around, but because crime cartels where not illegal until much latter, as was the case with many things we would consider a crime today.

Example ..... Drugs like opium's, heroin, cocaine marijuana ..... beating a woman or Beating & killing your black slave was not a crime. child abuse went on with impunity ..... Drink driving was not even a crime. running a red light, parking for days with no need for a parking permit. .....

So forth so on ect ect.

crime has gone up' not because crime is on the rise. But because governments criminalize more & more activity's every year.

December 19, 2012
7:21 pm
Avatar
at1with0
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 9243
Member Since:
April 9, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

"capricorn" wrote: [quote="at1with0"]I think analyzing the data to study the effectiveness of gun control, one HAS to subdivide the data into at least two categories, crimes committed with a gun and without. The difference between crimes with guns and crimes without using guns is going to be the only thing that would prove or disprove the effectiveness of gun control.

I'll tell you what, you don't even need perform a study. I'll even concede to the fact that the number of crimes committed with a gun will probably fall near 0%. Obviously, if guns are hard to come by, then guns cant be used. However, again my argument is it will have no affect on overall crime. Isnt this what we are esentially trying to do figure out? How to reduce crime??

I would concede that banning guns may not reduce crime. But in my opinion, if ONE life is saved because of increased security with guns (via an agency similar in purpose and scope to the TSA), then it is worth it. However, someone along the lines said that banning guns would take them out of the hands of the innocent and put them in the hands of criminals, which I would tentatively agree with.

There simply is no simple solution but both keeping things as they are now and banning guns completely are untenable extremes. There has to be a middle ground of some kind.

People will still murder and kill regardless if its with a gun or not. So then I ask you, what is your goal with gun control? Just to say that people aren't killing with guns anymore???

Yes, absurd as it sounds to you, I would like it if the number of crimes committed with guns went down.

However, if you want to solve the problem of crime, gun control is not your answer. In fact, as the stats show, it can even have the reserve affect.

As far as using airplanes as human guided missiles, that was solved with installing a $20 lock on the cabin door. All the other TSA stuff is there to inconvenience americans and has cost us all much more than its worth. Much like Gun Control would.

Well there's the rub.

How many airplane attacks have succeeded after the institution of the TSA?

If the number is zero, then the TSA can't be dismissed outright as being irrelevant to plane attacks.

If there were some kind of gun control that preceded a full ten years (well, 11 technically) without a mass murder performed with guns, especially the automatic kind, I would argue that said gun control saved at least one life and was therefore worth it.

"it is easy to grow crazy"

December 19, 2012
7:24 pm
Avatar
at1with0
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 9243
Member Since:
April 9, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

"rath" wrote: Like i said already.

Ever hear of the ad nauseam fallacy?

"it is easy to grow crazy"

December 19, 2012
7:35 pm
Avatar
capricorn
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 722
Member Since:
July 20, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

"at1with0" wrote: if ONE life is saved because of increased security with guns (via an agency similar in purpose and scope to the TSA), then it is worth it.

I guess this is where you and I simply have a fundamentally difference of opinion. I think that our freedom is not free (i know that sound grossly cliche and extreme patriotic) but it is true. We have soldiers on the front lines in Afghanistan fighting a war and it seems like thousands of lives are worth it.

The 2nd amendment is there so that we can protect ourselves and once you begin to take that away (like the british tried to do in the 18th century, and the Germans did leading up to the rise of the Nazi party) then you secede control of your freedom.

As far as the TSA is concerned, the effectiveness can be summed up here from an article I pulled from newsweek
http://img252.imageshack.us/img252/2029 ... 528929.jpg

"a free society depends on a virtuous and moral people."

December 19, 2012
7:41 pm
Avatar
capricorn
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 722
Member Since:
July 20, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

"rath" wrote: Yet you still have not shown an overall rise in crime .... & you cant.

Overall crime figures rise 6pc in Qld
By Eric Tlozek, Charmaine Kane and Bruce Atkinson
Updated Wed Oct 24, 2012 9:23pm AEDT
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-10-24/o ... ld/4331272

"a free society depends on a virtuous and moral people."

December 19, 2012
7:45 pm
Avatar
rath
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 4297
Member Since:
April 9, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

"capricorn" wrote: [quote="at1with0"]Is your point here that there is no point in criminalizing something that people are just gonna do anyway?

But in regards to this conversation, my point here is that Guns are not the problem, there are various other factors which contribute to overall violence.
Education (or lack thereof)
Prescription Drugs
The Mentally Ill
The desensitizing of culture (In relation to Violence in Media).

Again, you can outlaw guns, but psychopaths will turn to other means of violence. Look at what the terrorists did on 9/11. Should we ban airplanes because of it? Of course not! The core of the problem isn't airplanes, it is something else.

🙄

Less guns on the street means it is less likely a nut job or mentally ill individual can get their hands on a gun & kill mass numbers of people.

all other means of mass murder require much more planning .... & as a result, will more likely lead to the individual being caught before acting on his/her plan.

Thus ... lives saved.

December 19, 2012
7:48 pm
Avatar
capricorn
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 722
Member Since:
July 20, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

"capricorn" wrote: [quote="rath"]Yet you still have not shown an overall rise in crime .... & you cant.

Overall crime figures rise 6pc in Qld
By Eric Tlozek, Charmaine Kane and Bruce Atkinson
Updated Wed Oct 24, 2012 9:23pm AEDT
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-10-24/o ... ld/4331272

"a free society depends on a virtuous and moral people."

Forum Timezone: America/Los_Angeles

Most Users Ever Online: 288

Currently Online:
55 Guest(s)

Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)

Top Posters:

greeney2: 10268

bionic: 9870

Lashmar: 5289

tigger: 4576

rath: 4297

DIss0n80r: 4161

sandra: 3858

frrostedman: 3815

Wing-Zero: 3278

Tairaa: 2842

Member Stats:

Guest Posters: 2

Members: 24523

Moderators: 0

Admins: 2

Forum Stats:

Groups: 8

Forums: 31

Topics: 8855

Posts: 123885

Newest Members:

ielts, MyOpicvoid, Dee, Gabriel, Dave, ieltsboss75, Mia, Art, Ryan L, donaldburton

Administrators: John Greenewald: 623, blackvault: 1776